Column: Deafening Silence

The military coup in Thailand last September was reminiscent of similar attempts in the Philippines in decades past. The difference was that citizens fought hard to restore democracy and uphold civilian supremacy. The struggle of Filipinos in those days shaped what the country has become today, although two decades later its institutions still face problems and their strength is threatened by their frailties.

    Like Thailand, the Philippines is not immune to military coups, conspiracies to grab power and attempts to destroy its Constitution and democratic institutions. When the Marcos regime fell in 1986 and democracy was restored, the country suppressed numerous coup attempts by the military and Marcos loyalists -- efforts to overthrow the new government of President Corazon Aquino. It was the people's struggle to frustrate any attempt to seize power, and the judiciary's firm assertion of authority, that played a major role in the country's most critical period.

    When Marcos was in office, the Constitution gave him enormous powers, including the authority to declare martial law, allowing him to rule over every aspect of life for two decades. It was the same Constitution that Marcos had crafted earlier and had ratified through a referendum in the early 1970s. It left the entire country hostage to one man's ill will and manipulation, in conspiracy with his cronies and military loyalists. It emboldened Marcos to wield power and gave his government legitimacy despite its atrocities.

    This scenario looks set to repeat itself during the upcoming referendum in Thailand on Aug. 19, in which Thais are supposed to ratify the Constitution crafted by members of an assembly handpicked by the military junta, a process that did not include the people.

    In the Philippines, had there not been such an enormous outpouring of support by the people for the transitional government during the 1986 People Power Revolution, Aquino would not have been able to exercise the government's overwhelming powers. These included the removal of provincial governors and mayors, giving the government a free hand for reform, and the convening of a Constitutional Convention with members -- though handpicked by Aquino -- drafting the present 1987 Constitution.

    At that time, the Aquino government's considerable power emanated from the people's desire for democracy. Subsequent attempts by the military and Marcos loyalists to take over did not succeed, nor did coup attempts in following years. The key to the Constitution's strength is that it grants power to established institutions with the people's support.

    Some may think the Philippine experience in fighting for democracy is not a perfect example as the country still faces problems that threaten its political institutions. However, the lesson that the Thais perhaps can learn is the mentality that Filipinos discovered the hard way -- their intolerance for military takeovers or threats to abolish the Constitution. Despite numerous attempted coups in the past 20 years, none have succeeded. Those responsible have been held accountable for their illegal acts, particularly by the judiciary. They were charged, detained, prosecuted and given prison sentences.

    Over the years, a number of prominent coup participants have joined the democratic process, seeking and winning elected positions and taking part in the affairs of the government. They ended up submitting to the democratic system and acknowledging that officials must have the mandate of the people through elections, not through extralegal exercises or the use of violence.

    The Philippines too went through a political crisis involving allegations of corruption like those leveled against former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his allies. Similar allegations were made against former President Joseph Estrada, but the people, including the legislature and the judiciary, forced him to step down. The legislature impeached him while the judiciary prosecuted him. The military did not intervene in this process or attempt to take power or abolish the Constitution, as happened in Thailand last year.

    The people's outrage came as a surprise to the current administration when it attempted to introduce an amendment to the Constitution by convening a Constitutional Assembly, composed of a majority of the government's allies in both houses of Congress, without holding a referendum as constitutionally required. This unpopular move led to the defeat of some politicians in the midterm elections in May.

    The judiciary has also exercised its power to uphold the Constitution. When President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo declared a state of emergency in February 2006 and subsequently issued General Order No. 5 to the armed forces, which included provisions reducing the protection of civil and political liberties, the Supreme Court ruled that part of her declaration and order were unconstitutional. This was the result of challenges by the legal community and concerned groups to the president's declaration and order.

    Although the political system contains weaknesses that individuals and political groups seek to exploit for their own advantage, democratic institutions have been strong enough thus far to thwart them. For a country to achieve this stability two decades after the fall of a dictator, and despite a long colonial history, indicates an enormous shift in the mentality of the people. They have discovered they can play a part in running the affairs of state and holding their leaders accountable.

    --

    (Pepe Panglao, a journalist for many years in Mindanao in the southern Philippines, is based in metro Manila. He seeks to share the issues facing Filipinos throughout the country with the international community.)